Ghost Inspector MCP vs Keploy

In-depth architectural comparison of the Ghost Inspector MCP and Keploy MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose Ghost Inspector MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Ghost Inspector MCP Details

Choose Keploy when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Keploy Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Ghost Inspector MCP Developer Tools	Keploy Developer Tools
Summary	Analyze, validate and safely update Ghost Inspector end-to-end browser tests	End-to-end API testing — generate and run tests from OpenAPI, curl, Postman, or real user traffic.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ghost-inspector-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "ghost-inspector-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "keploy": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "keploy"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons